My husband and I discussed this issue before we were married, just to make sure we were on the same page. We both wanted children, and knew that with my medical history there may have been some setbacks in conception. We decided that if we weren't able to conceive naturally after a reasonable period of time that we would explore the fertility treatments available, but we also decided that the pursuit of the creation of a child with our combined genetic material wasn't worth spending tens of thousands of dollars we did not have, nor the heartache of knowingly creating embryos that have a less than even chance of survival. We decided that if we were unable to have children without going to extreme measures, we would pursue adoption or decide to remain childless. (I can't imagine entering into a marriage without discussing such matters--In my mind there are three major deal-breaker issues that you have to have a consensus on if your marriage is to survive: Money, Religion, and Children)
We have two children. Both were conceived with a little bit of pharmaceutical help, and I can't picture life now without them. We were lucky enough to have the family we wanted with a minimum amount of invasive and ethically questionable activities or treatments. Heck, I took a pill everyday to NOT have a baby for years, taking a pill once a day for a few months was a pretty small price to pay.
I do understand the desire to have children and I believe that people should have the choice to pursue medical avenues to aid in conception. Where it becomes a problem, in my opinion, is when people do so the exclusion of all other options. If a couple who earns only a modest amount of money (or a wealthy couple for that matter) decides to spend 50 grand trying to get pregnant, there's something wrong with that picture. At some point, the reasons people should have children have gotten lost in the quest for the holy grail of reproducing your genetic mix. It's a form of hubris to think that our genes must be passed on to a new generation, while ignoring the fact that there are other ways to impact the world by shaping the character of another human being. If extreme measures are taken, I say call a spade a spade, and don't drape it in the cloak of "God's will" or "medical miracles". Present it for what it is: A relatively selfish desire to have your own biology go forward.
Having a child a deeply personal choice, and I don't think anyone should regale other people with tales of the specifics of the medical barriers or the cost involved. Around the time I became pregnant with our first child, there was a woman in my office who had been trying for a few years to get pregnant and was spending (by her own account) upwards of $25 thousand dollars in that pursuit. I remember the hushed voices of other employees admonishing everyone not to 'celebrate' other people's pregnancies around this woman. She would burst into tears and rail against the unfairness of life when she found out that someone else was expecting a child. She herself told us how, when her own sister announced that she was going to have a baby, she threw herself onto the couch and sobbed, and that she didn't know why her sister would make such a 'cruel announcement in her presence'. Her histrionics were horribly distasteful, and I had a very hard time being sympathetic for someone who apparently took such delight in garnering the sympathy of others without ever once considering that other people had their own problems and setbacks. I wanted to tell her "Life's tough all over, sister. Get over yourself." Her personality in this respect, and others, made me wonder what kind of mother she would be when/if she did have a child.
Now, with all of that said, should the particular co-worker you describe receive any sort of special treatment as the absences she has taken for Dr. visits? No. Should the fact that her fertility quest has made her a less valuable and dependable employee be reflected on her work record? Yes. Should insurance cover extraordinary costs associated with pursuing pregnancies? Absolutely not. Should she be allowed to pursue pregnancy at all costs? That's an ethical question, and the area of bio-ethics is one hell of a mine-field to navigate. I became interested in the field while reading a novel a while back and my research into field was both interesting and absolutely terrifying at the same time. The questions are sticky when you push into morality as decision-making. I don't have the answers.
(A comment on the McCaughey's (sp?)... I always thought it was alarming that they had thousands of dollars to spare trying to get pregnant, but no money for dental care. That woman's teeth were atrocious--I remember they had to airbrush them on the cover of Newsweek to 'clean her up' a bit. But hey, having seven babies led someone to donate her braces and bridgework, so I guess that problem took care of itself...)
